>> There are lots of other "stateless" linguistic groups, the issue isn't
>> an Indian monopoly by any means, and it is only partially mitigated by
>> the well intentioned, often pro bono acts of a few individuals.
>
>Michael Everson is not an "individual": he is, for WG2 purposes,
>Ireland.

I protest. We _do_ have a national committee here, John. True, when I give
advice on Tibetan the committee doesn't always have much to say, but you'd
be surprised.

>If you look through the proposers of the 10646 Amendments,
>you will find Ireland as proposer or co-proposer a disproportionate
>number of times....

A disproportionate number? I'd prefer you to say "many". We do the work.
You can tell from the source field in a proposal whether it is an expert
contribution or a National Body contribution, John.

>> States
>> are not too keen on minority languages ...
>
>Some, even most, states. Not all.

Ireland, as a small, neutral country has taken the principled stance that
lesser-used languages should be supported in the UCS. This does not suggest
that other countries have or have not done so. Some appear to have taken
the stance to oppose lesser-used languages. Others smile benignly and let
us do our work.